Barry Baker

Loves journalism, is not a journalist. Loves politics, is not a politician. Loves the media, is not a medium. Barry is committed to helping the world become a more interesting place with Power of Opinion.

The end result of the 1996 campaign was that the NDP won the election with 39 of 75 seats, but with only 39.45% of the popular vote. Gordon Campbell's Liberals earned 37,534 more votes for 41.82% of the popular vote, but claimed just 33 seats. The Reform and Progressive Democratic parties collectively polled more than 15% of the popular vote, but claimed just 3 seats between them. Mr. Campbell's loss despite his superior showing in the popular vote has since motivated him to explore alternate electoral systems such as the Single Transferable Vote system proposed by the Citizen's Assembly on Electoral Reform, which BC voted down in the 2005 referendum.

A review of individual riding results for the 1996 election indicates that if the three sibling centre-right parties had managed to ally themselves in some way (via a coalition or other means) prior to the election rather than splitting the vote, the NDP tally could have been reduced by as many as 20 of their 39 seats, and the Casino Gate never would have seen the light of day.

Likewise, a review of individual riding results for the 2001 provincial election indicate that had voters not split their ballots between the NDP and Green Party, the left would have won an additional 7 seats, qualified for the benefits associated with official party status, and presented a much more effective opposition to the Liberal majority. The impact of a coalition on the left would have been much more profound however in the 2005 election, when the Green and NDP votes combined would have won an additional 11 seats to take the prize and deny the Liberals a second mandate.

I respectfully disagree with the notion that our electoral systems needs fixing. Voters in the two Kamloops ridings were the only voters in the province to deny even a simple majority to the STV question (the referendum required 60% of the popular vote throughout the province, and a simple majority in 60% of the ridings), and we got it right.

Our electoral system is not broken, and neither is the party system. What sometimes gets broken however, is the parties themselves.

Case in point the Progressive Conservatives, which in 1993 lost all but two of their 151 seats in the House of Commons. The Bloc Québécois formed the official opposition with just 13.52% of the popular vote, while the Progressive Conservatives and Reform parties polled with 18.69% and 13.52% of the popular vote, respectively. The right took a well-deserved beating in that election, but developed such a taste for its own blood in the process that it didn't manage to put a winning formula together for another 13 years.

The solution to the right's demise was its willingness to embrace renewal while accepting a spectra of opinions within the coalition.

Now let's look at the left; the NDP has been flanked by the growth of the Green Party in both federal and provincial elections, much like the Green Party and Ralph Nader have disrupted Democratic election results in the United States. Buzz Hargrove of the Canadian Auto Workers (CAW) saw the writing on the wall in the run-up to the 2006 federal election, and bucked years of tradition by backing then-Prime Minister Paul Martin and the Liberal party rather than his brothers and sisters in the NDP. It didn't work, but he had the right idea.

In 1990, Robert J. Jackson and Doreen Jackson published the 2nd edition of Politics in Canada (Prentice-Hall Canada Ltd.), in which they wrote:

Electoral systems do not determine the nature of party systems, nor the type of government, majority or minority, single-party or coalition, in any country. Governmental outcomes are largely a function of the balance of party forces: the party system, in turn, is largely shaped by a country's political culture and social structure and by the electoral behaviour of its citizens.

Canada doesn't need a new electoral system, and neither does British Columbia. Why
legislate, when the power to build winning coalitions already lays
within the hands of the members and leaders of our political parties?
The problem is that the parties on the left apparently still haven't
experienced enough pain to resolve the problem on their own, hence the
cry for an electoral system that will allow them to avoid the hard work
of building bridges instead of silos.

To share your thoughts with Right Up Your Alley: Kamloops readers, click on "Comments" (below).

The end result of the 1996 campaign was that the NDP won the election with 39 of 75 seats, but with only 39.45% of the popular vote. Gordon Campbell's Liberals earned 37,534 more votes for 41.82% of the popular vote, but claimed just 33 seats. The Reform and Progressive Democratic parties collectively polled more than 15% of the popular vote, but claimed just 3 seats between them. Mr. Campbell's loss despite his superior showing in the popular vote has since motivated him to explore alternate electoral systems such as the Single Transferable Vote system proposed by the Citizen's Assembly on Electoral Reform, which BC voted down in the 2005 referendum.

A review of individual riding results for the 1996 election indicates that if the three sibling centre-right parties had managed to ally themselves in some way (via a coalition or other means) prior to the election rather than splitting the vote, the NDP tally could have been reduced by as many as 20 of their 39 seats, and the Casino Gate never would have seen the light of day.

Likewise, a review of individual riding results for the 2001 provincial election indicate that had voters not split their ballots between the NDP and Green Party, the left would have won an additional 7 seats, qualified for the benefits associated with official party status, and presented a much more effective opposition to the Liberal majority. The impact of a coalition on the left would have been much more profound however in the 2005 election, when the Green and NDP votes combined would have won an additional 11 seats to take the prize and deny the Liberals a second mandate.

I respectfully disagree with the notion that our electoral systems needs fixing. Voters in the two Kamloops ridings were the only voters in the province to deny even a simple majority to the STV question (the referendum required 60% of the popular vote throughout the province, and a simple majority in 60% of the ridings), and we got it right.

Our electoral system is not broken, and neither is the party system. What sometimes gets broken however, is the parties themselves.

Case in point the Progressive Conservatives, which in 1993 lost all but two of their 151 seats in the House of Commons. The Bloc Québécois formed the official opposition with just 13.52% of the popular vote, while the Progressive Conservatives and Reform parties polled with 18.69% and 13.52% of the popular vote, respectively. The right took a well-deserved beating in that election, but developed such a taste for its own blood in the process that it didn't manage to put a winning formula together for another 13 years.

The solution to the right's demise was its willingness to embrace renewal while accepting a spectra of opinions within the coalition.

Now let's look at the left; the NDP has been flanked by the growth of the Green Party in both federal and provincial elections, much like the Green Party and Ralph Nader have disrupted Democratic election results in the United States. Buzz Hargrove of the Canadian Auto Workers (CAW) saw the writing on the wall in the run-up to the 2006 federal election, and bucked years of tradition by backing then-Prime Minister Paul Martin and the Liberal party rather than his brothers and sisters in the NDP. It didn't work, but he had the right idea.

In 1990, Robert J. Jackson and Doreen Jackson published the 2nd edition of Politics in Canada (Prentice-Hall Canada Ltd.), in which they wrote:

Electoral systems do not determine the nature of party systems, nor the type of government, majority or minority, single-party or coalition, in any country. Governmental outcomes are largely a function of the balance of party forces: the party system, in turn, is largely shaped by a country's political culture and social structure and by the electoral behaviour of its citizens.

Canada doesn't need a new electoral system, and neither does British Columbia. Why
legislate, when the power to build winning coalitions already lays
within the hands of the members and leaders of our political parties?
The problem is that the parties on the left apparently still haven't
experienced enough pain to resolve the problem on their own, hence the
cry for an electoral system that will allow them to avoid the hard work
of building bridges instead of silos.

To share your thoughts with Right Up Your Alley: Kamloops readers, click on "Comments" (below).